Health officials argue a travel ban not the best way to protect against Ebola.
Published:
WINDSOR LOCKS, Conn. (WWLP)- 'I'm a little scared about it,' Gary Vonderesch, a frequent traveler from New Hampshire, told 22News about his concerns over the Ebola virus. 'The advice my wife gave me this morning was 'wash your hands, don't touch your face.' And another thing she told me to do was wear long sleeves.'
Now, several political leaders say a travel ban will help eliminate those fears, but federal health officials say it's not the best option, arguing a travel ban would limit needed medical supplies to the most affected areas of West Africa, which would ultimately spread the disease further.
Health officials for the Center for Disease Control and Prevention argue that the disease is too contained to put a travel ban in place, but travelers at Bradley International Airport told 22News on Monday they'd like to see travel ban in place before they see the spread of the disease get out of control in the United States.
Mellissa Rydzy, who often flies for work said she's not fearful, but thinks general precautions, like a travel ban from flights coming in from West Africa, could be beneficial.
'I do feel fine with that because, absolutely if they're coming from that region let's try and stop it and keep it contained and you know not have it spread,' Rydzy said.
Pilot Tom Moon told 22News he feels the opposite, 'I think the risk is very low compared to some of the other risks out there.'
One of those other risks health officials warn passengers to protect themselves against right now is the flu. Unlike the Ebola virus the flu is airborne, but some symptoms of the two are similar, including a fever.
International airports in New York City, Chicago, Washington, Atlanta, and Newark New Jersey, that have the highest number of incoming passengers from the three West African countries where Ebola is most widespread, are currently doing temperature screenings.
